On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: > "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <c...@debian.org> writes: > > But probably for the shell cases it is easier to remove 'essential' > > flag (especially for a minimal nearly POSIX-like shell like dash), > > because the interface of #!/bin/sh is defined in policy (10.3). > > Except that every package in Debian that explicitly uses bash has no > declared dependency on bash because it's essential. I think attempting to > go through and add all those dependencies and test would be a huge waste > of time and resources.
We can certainly retain bash as essential but still make dash essential and switch to dash. It is not like you will be able to remove bash from the vast majority of the Debian systems out there anyway, so it doesn't matter if it remains "essential" for a while. The embedded crowd would want to find a way to get rid of bash, though, and trying to make bash a non-essential package seems like a worthwile effort because of that. It can even be reasonably automated, since you can rgrep /bin/bash to find out scripts that use it on packages that don't declare a dependency on bash... -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
